2021
DOI: 10.1007/s41066-021-00273-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multiple attribute decision-making based on cubical fuzzy aggregation operators

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It has been observed from the above discussion that the ranking function plays a key role in a CF DM process in ordering the alternatives and the existing ranking functions in the literature (Khan et al 2022) To facilitate our discussion, the rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 delivers the definition of CFS with some properties. Section 3 presents the available ranking functions of CFS in the literature.…”
Section: Motivation and Layout Of The Papermentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It has been observed from the above discussion that the ranking function plays a key role in a CF DM process in ordering the alternatives and the existing ranking functions in the literature (Khan et al 2022) To facilitate our discussion, the rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 delivers the definition of CFS with some properties. Section 3 presents the available ranking functions of CFS in the literature.…”
Section: Motivation and Layout Of The Papermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Table 3 concludes that our proposed ICFSF is more efficient in comparing the CFNs of all cases. Also, Table 4 portrays the reliability of the proposed ICFSF over the existing score function by comparing with the results obtained in (Khan et al 2022) and the geometrical comparison is portrayed in Fig. 4.…”
Section: Comparison Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This study used the most widely employed (and credible) multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM, or multi-attribute decision-making [MADM]) model, AHP, as the main multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) method. In the field of MCDM (defined more generally to include multiobjective decision-making [MODM]), incorporation of the fuzzy concept to address uncertainty (Chutia, 2021;Jiang & Hu, 2021;Muneeb et al, 2021;Rahman, 2022;Tavana et al, 2021;Wang et al, 2021;Xue et al, 2021), novel interdisciplinary applications of existing models (Garg & Rani, 2022;Majumder et al, 2021;Mishra et al, 2021;Turgut & Erdogan, 2020;Zhuang & Yu, 2021), and model refinements (Gong & Fan, 2021;Jin et al, 2021;Khan et al, 2022;Ni et al, 2022;Rahman et al, 2021) are the most popular topics to date. The research context of this study falls within the scope of the second topic.…”
Section: The Analytic Hierarchy Process (Ahp)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Group decision making refers to the process in which different decision makers give their preference or evaluation of alternatives according to different criteria based on their cognitive ability and knowledge background to obtain the priority relationship of alternatives (Khan et al 2022 ; Rong et al 2020a , 2020b , 2021 , 2022 ; Senapati et al 2023 ). In the process of decision analysis in practical problems, due to the prevalence of uncertainty and the limitations of decision makers’ knowledge level in decision analysis of practical problems, the challenge of portraying imprecise and unclear information is becoming increasingly precise.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%